It wasn't Tory leaders. The only one who's name I remember was Vince Cable. Another one might have been Chuka Umunna or Anna Soubry talking about the Change party. Probably someone from the Labour party calling for a second referendum and another talking about stopping a no deal exit. All current news stories but also all strongly anti Brexit. I remember being astonished at there being four or five on the trot.

I am not sure which edition of the Andrew Marr show is being referred to, but he went through all the prospective PMs, either directly or via one of there supporters over a period of several weeks. It may be you regard 5 of these as remainers, but if so, they were all squeezed into a single show, whereas the other candidates will have got a longer slot on another day.

If that is not what you are referring to, please identify exactly which show and which 5 remainers and we can discuss it more meaningfully.

Does Andrew Marr work for Murdoch, Rothermere or any of the other billionaire press barons? If the BBC are showing any bias, which I would dispute, it is more than suitably offset by the mega-rich cabal providing most of the news.

Over a quarter (27.3 per cent) of the press is owned by Lord Rothermere and 24.9 per cent by Rupert Murdoch – between them these two men have over 50 per cent of the printed press.

Over three quarters (77.8 per cent) of the press is owned by a handful of billionaires. There are only 88 billionaires among the 63 million people in the UK and most of the barons do not even live in the UK.

Not to mention Sky TV.

Do you think those billionaires want their tax affairs inspected by the new EU tax avoidance rules?

I missed it. Having heard the first question to be an unpleasantly phrased question on Boris, I went back to watching Fantom on Quest. They were renovating an old Citroen 2CV and it ended with a can can moment. When I switched back someone was finally calling the BBC out on its anti Brexit bias. Fiona denied it of course but it's becoming more and more obvious. There was an Andrew Marr show four or five weeks ago where he interviewed five remainers on the trot. In the last five minutes of the program he spoke to someone I'd not heard of who wanted the kind of soft Brexit that isn't really leaving at all. I can't see how that is anything other than deliberate bias.

Totally brilliant and heartrending contribution at the beginning of Question Time from Francesca Martinez. If you missed it catch it on the repeat or iPlayer. If you still vote Tory after hearing it, you deserve to hang your head in shame.

Again, everyone understands what was meant Nigel. Is there any news that says brexit will benefit the economy? Benefit the peace in Northern Ireland? Benefit the ordinary people of the UK as opposed to the Rees-Moggs and Rupert Murdochs of the world? Benefit the scientific research world? Benefit pan-European and world security? Benefit anything at all?

The last pan-European war led to the murder of six million Jews by fascists. Remember? "pan-European"= across the whole of Europe. I thought Steve Shaw had just accepted that not all of Europe was at war, nor even 'occupied'.

The dissolution of the EU would make war in Europe far more likely. The EU insists on democracy in its member states. Without the EU it is likely that some countries would retreat from democracy. We live in times in which the far right is in ascendancy. Democracies rarely fight each other in wars. The last pan-European war led to the murder of six million Jews by fascists. Remember?

That was a careless error on my part. I could have said one of the very few countries now in the EU not to have endured a fascist regime in the 20th century. Switzerland isn't an EU country, by the way. The point stands, however.

"The trouble is that the EU have been so good at creating cohesion that virtually everyone in the UK has forgotten what living in a fascist state means Not quite true. The Brexit party Le Pen Continual rioting in France including teargas released on May Day Catalonia and banned MEP and Independence struggle. I could go on! A report rather out of date in view of the recent EU MEP elections.

"The trouble is that the EU have been so good at creating cohesion that virtually everyone in the UK has forgotten what living in a fascist state means, and as mainland UK was never occupied in WW2 the noone here has experienced it for real, and bizarrely British people now would prefer to live in an insular, oppressive state, rather than the freedoms we enjoy through international cooperation."

That's an excellent point. We are the only EU country that didn't endure Nazi occupation. That helps to explain the difference between our insular national mindset (if there is such a thing) and that of the other EU members. I suppose they recall far more sharply than we do why the Common Market was founded in the first place. Neither my children nor I have ever been called up to fight in a European war. One of the many good reasons for being a member of the EU is to keep that threat at bay. And were there to be no no EU it would be a real threat, what with the rise of far-right populism.

I think it very unlikely to go anything like this far, but in extremis it would be police demanding to see your papers whenever they wished This already happens within the EU in some countries. From personal experience I know that it happens regularly in Spain and Ireland if driving a vehicle Most of the time it is to check the car is legally on the road, but in both countries a driving license must be carried while driving so it is not unusual to be asked to show it. Other road blocks in Ireland are more thorough,involving social welfare and revenue officers as wellas the Gardaí, but are not as common. The UK is very lucky that such roadblocks are extremely rare, but ANPR has much the same impact. Whether such checks are a good or bad thing, or if they reduce criminality, is another discussion. The reality is that such checks already exist elsewhere within the EU and are not considered onerous.

Obligation to show papers/ID on the street would be a massive erosion of freedoms, almost going back to wartime/cold war Europe. Even countries that have retain obligations to carry id rarely enforce it these days, unlike 70s 80s Czechoslovakia where the brutal VB would arrest people for not carrying id and carry out frequent spot check to make sure people are complying

We indeed seem to be shifting towards far right politics, and if that happens, the impact on personal freedom would be far far worse that what leavers wrongly imaging that the EU impose on us.

Reading that farage whats to relax gun laws should be a serious warning of what may be to come in the future.

The trouble is that the EU have been so good at creating cohesion that virtually everyone in the UK has forgotten what living in a fascist state means, and as mainland UK was never occupied in WW2 the noone here has experienced it for real, and bizarrely British people now would prefer to live in an insular, oppressive state, rather than the freedoms we enjoy through international cooperation.

We should be worried about that and also the readiness of people to blame people from Europe for their oppression.

I am not so sure about the Common Travel Area exception. It did exist before the EU, certainly, but at the time the Republic did not have the free movement with France, etc etc: it had a hard border with Europe. As a member of the EU, that has changed. So now there is free movement into the Republic, there would be free movement via the CTA between the Republic and the North, and free movement between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

This may happen, because Parliament doesn't seem to think at all about Ireland unless it is forced into it, but I think there is only one way of avoiding it while still having a CTA: much more frequent ID checks of all UK citizens as they go about their daily business to find people who have got in by some means. I think it very unlikely to go anything like this far, but in extremis it would be police demanding to see your papers whenever they wished. We have already gone a fair way down this road as it is, with identity needing to be proved when getting a job, or renting a flat, for example.

SPB The exception will be travel from uk to ireland, this is covered by the common travel arrangement which predates either country joining the common market, however the whole situation is a complete mess, what is need is either a general election or a second referendum

The significance is that if we are forced to leave without a deal, for the next 10 years when we visit other states we can pretend to be ignorant and try to use the biometric microchip gates on the grounds that an EU passport should work in EU passport channels. If enough visitors do this, then hopefully passport officials will eventually get fed up and just give us free movement anyway.

A more important issue is that by virtue of being a national in an EU member state, we enjoy the same visa-free travel as the rest of the EU outside of the EU - for example ETA for visiting Canada. What has the FCO done so far to force the rest of the world to put in place identical passport arrangements for the UK on 1 November - just in case?? If Visas will be required in the future, what arrangements have the FCO made to ensure that the tax payer and not the individual foots the bill? What arrangements have the FCA made in the event of reciprocal visaless travel ending to force the embassies and consular offices to have staff at every airport in the UK to process visas at less than an hour's notice, and for the FCA present to pay the visa fees?

Another issue - HM Customs have not yet confirmed that there will be no change to the rules regarding limits and duties of purchases made in EU states, or if there will be changes, the FCO putting in place measures for the tax payers rather than the individual to pay the additional duties.

What measures have the FCA put in place to force the EU to allow UK nationals to live/study/work in/retire to other EU states beyond the 90 day restrictions that applies to the rest of the world?

We are about to face the biggest degradation of our rights in living memory, and our useless government is prepared to just let it happen as if people don't matter?

Finally, why are UK nationals, if they fall in love with someone fro Europe, why leavers think they have the right to decide whether or not they can pursue heir relationships. If the Tories get away with the minimum wage cap, then surely we should be deporting all UK nationals who fail to meet the same earning level. In my book having different rules for different people is racist.

I could go on for hours about further losses of rights, but I will leave it at this. I hope all the above is in line with the original purpose of this thread.

Ye gods and little fishes ....... sorry guys I know this is not strictly Brexit but one of the Tory hopefuls as leader of the party, and therefore the government, who have to sort out the complete shambles left by May is alleged to have claimed £8,750 in expenses for a personal photographer.

Not so. Parliament must be accountable to the electorate. For a rabble to seize control with the connivance of the speaker leads to zero accountability. There lies the way to the socialist paradise, National Socialism, a totalitarian state! It can onlybe described as reckless behaviour " The Commons is not itself able to govern. Governing requires coherence in responding to events and circumstances nationally and internationally. Therefore, for so long as the Commons is unwilling to withdraw its confidence, Her Majesty’s ministers can and should insist on their responsibility to govern. Legislation designed to usurp the Government’s functions should be blocked, in the first instance by relying on the House’s own procedures. If the Speaker were to subvert the normal rules, as he has, the Government might legitimately prorogue Parliament, ending a session of Parliament prematurely to prevent a Bill from being passed by both Houses.

It is possible to argue that the attempt was wise, or unwise. It is possible to argue that the attempt was desirable or not. It is possible to argue that it was a good use of an opposition day or not.

Just about the only thing it is not possible to argue was that it was not accountable. The opposition had to account for the reasons they wanted to do this, and Parliament held them to account and found them wanting. But is was 100% held to account for its proposal.

The cross party motion failed. The government has won and rightly so. A Lawful opposition is one thing,trying to wrest control of Parliament with no accountability smacks of sedition. Perhaps this should be tested in the courts- it has far more substance than numbers on the side of a bus.

There are many nasty things found in Irish bogs. One, that is yet another import, is the Canadian Pitcher Plant. First the victim is lured to the rim of the pitchers by attractive meaty-coloured patterns, and by tempting droplets of nectar. When the victim aarives, it soon loses its footing on the slippery ridges around the throat of the pitcher, helped by hairs which point downward preventing its escape. Victims drown in a watery grave containing digestive juices and detergents for penetrating the microscopic breathing holes along the sides of an insect's body.

The plant increases its chances of making a successful catch by spicing its nectar with intoxicating narcotic, so that the victims roll around in a drunken stupor. The walls of the pitcher are lined with slippery cells, and with no foothold to grab onto, the prisoner slowly falls into the watery depths of the pitcher.

It was very pertinent, SPB. It is a good example of how we have managed to get some of the imagery Brexiteers want, but none of the substance.

The value of a passport is entirely in how other countries treat it (plus some in-country ID purposes.) To that end, it matters not a jot whether the cover says European, United Kingdom, Rivendell or The Land of the Orange Ogres(*). Do other countries - France, Germany US, Argentina, Thailand and the hundred or so others - recognise it as valid? That is all that counts in the end. So changing the wording on the cover has the same real significance as changing the colour. A meaningless alteration to keep Brexiteers happier, but no change of any significance at all.

* A friend once lived in a rented property of that name. Any similarity to Trump is co-incidental.

Editorial content my arse, sound bites of the lowest quality from a disreputable, right wing blogger, who had links to the BNP and described himself as a "right-wing pain in the butt" who, again in his own words, "sought to "smear Labour MPs and left-leaning lawyers and writers"

I guess I will have to grovel. I had it fixed in my mind you were using a nom de plume of Mr Robinson whom I have frequently been accused of supporting.

If we are going to disregard journalists because of drunk driving, bankruptcy and other failings and not gauge their worth by their editorial content, why hold politicians in such high esteem? Were you not one of those arguing they were mighty men like men of yore, much more qualified to make decisions than the little people. One quite happily admits to having used class One drugs, one has been booted out for perverting the course of justice,several are subject to possible recall procedures because of lying to their electorate and labour MPs have been accused of antisemitism. I would suggest their feet of clay are far more hydrated than those of Mr Guido. Let us look at Mr Gove,a PM hopeful. After the revelation that Gove was sniffing lines of cocaine whilst writing lines attacking middle-class cocaine use, rival campaigns are now trawling through Gove’s Times articles looking for interesting policy positions. One that was passed to Guido is particularly appealing and would likely go down a treat with a large segment of the Tory membership. “Bring back hanging”, a classic vote winner with Tory members if there ever was one! or Chucklebuttie having her kids educated in public schools, with Diane Abbot, Emily Thornberry and Seumas Milne sending their children to selective state schools, while Angela Rayner blasted the Government’s plans for a new model of grammar schools insisting they “do not improve social mobility” and are “not good for our education system”. Classic labour hypocrisy there I am afraid. Dachas for the elite, the gulags for the hoipolloi

Your outrage would appear most exceedingly selective,but then blinkers are a by product of wearing lefty rose tinted specs. Too much gruniard addles the brain!